Home > PJ (current issue) > Letters | Search

PJ Online homeThe Pharmaceutical Journal
Vol 274 No 7342 p362
26 March 2005

This article
Reprint   Photocopy

PDF 80K, Acrobat Reader

Letters

· Council election
· The profession (5)
· Community pharmacy (3)
· Revalidation
· The Society
· Prescription charges


Letters to the Editor

Prescription charges

Abolition could save money

From Mr J. R. Elliot, MRPharmS

Further to the article by Clare Bellingham (PJ, 12 March, p293), I wonder if any consideration has been given to the potentially massive savings to be made by the total abolition of prescription charges.

As far as pharmacies are concerned, no staff time would need to be spent answering queries about exemptions, helping patients to tick the right boxes, checking the validity of claims, processing the payments, explaining why credit cards cannot be accepted, explaining why some items attract two charges and some items attract no charge, explaining why patient A can have three months’ supply for one charge, while patient B must pay monthly, advising that an item is cheaper to buy, advising about prepayment certificates, completing exemptions on behalf of patients unable to do so, checking daily for incomplete declarations (fine = £6.40 per item), separating the prescriptions into payment categories (why are contraceptives not treated the same as exempt items?), ensuring prescriptions are sorted correctly for dispatch to the Prescription Pricing Authority, checking that the PPA has deducted the correct number of charges, etc, etc.

Regarding the wider picture, one can imagine how costly in time and materials the operation of the exemption scheme must be: the information about yearly increases must be disseminated to all concerned; exemption certificate applications must be processed; claims must be checked at the PPA; and fraudulent claims must be investigated. These operations must require a whole army of bureaucrats and forests of trees.

In-pharmacy costs, apart from validity checks, are largely at the expense of the pharmacy owner, but has any attempt been made to quantify to what extent pharmacy is subsidising the scheme?

As for the costs to the NHS budget, it would be interesting to know whether the amount spent in collecting prescription charges on a mere 13 per cent of items dispensed exceeds the amount collected.

John Elliot
Market Rasen, Lincolnshire

Send your letter to The Editor

Previous Topic (The Society)

Back to Top


©The Pharmaceutical Journal